Karnataka High Court
Smt Thangamma M M vs The Divisonal Controller on 6 November, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:44682
MFA No. 1732 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1732 OF 2022(MV-D)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. THANGAMMA M. M.,
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS,
W/O LATE AIYAPPA,
2. SMT. KAVERIAMMA K. A.
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
D/O LATE AIYAPPA, W/O BOPANNA,
APPELLANTS NO.1 AND 2 ARE
R/AT NO.388, 14TH 'D' CROSS,
NEAR SANDEEP STORES,
EJIPURA VIVEKNAGAR,
BENGALURU SOUTH,
BENGALURU - 560 042.
3. SMT. SINDHU @ SINDHU VENKAT,
Digitally signed by AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
AASEEFA D/O AIYAPPA, W/O VENKAT
PARVEEN
R/AT DOOR NO.471, 1ST FLOOR
Location: HIGH 4TH BLOCK, 'B' CROSS,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA 11TH MAIN, KORMANGALA,
BENGALURU - 560 034.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. P. NATARAJU, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE DIVISONAL CONTROLLER,
KSRTC, RURAL DIVISION,
BANNI MANTAP, MYSURU - 570 009.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. S. NIRMMALA, ADVOCATE (VC))
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:44682
MFA No. 1732 of 2022
THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 07.10.2021 PASSED IN
MVC NO. 212/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. JUDGE, COURT
OF SMALL CAUSES AS A PRESIDING OFFICER, MACT, MYSURU,
PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION
AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Heard Sri.P.Nataraju, learned counsel for appellant who
appears physically before this Court. Also heard Smt.S.Nirmala,
learned counsel for respondent who appears through video
conference.
2. The claimants in MVC No.212/2018 that stood
pending before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Mysuru
and was disposed of through order dated 07.10.2021 are
before this Court seeking enhancement of compensation.
3. The first appellant being the wife, the appellants
No.2 and 3 being the married daughters of the deceased-
Aiyappa (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased' for brevity),
moved an application claiming compensation. The Tribunal
awarded a sum of Rs.5,08,000/- as compensation under the
following heads:
NC: 2024:KHC:44682
Sl. Heads of compensation Amount in
No Rs.
1 Towards medical expenditure 27,000-00
2 Compensation towards loss of
1,20,000-00
consortium
3 Towards estate 15,000-00
4 Towards transportation and
25,000-00
funeral expenses
5 Towards loss of dependency 3,21,000-00
Total 5,08,000-00
4. Arguing the matter Sri.P.Nataraju, learned counsel
for appellants submits that the appellants are aggrieved by the
sum that was deducted towards personal and living expenses of
the deceased. Learned counsel states that the deceased left
behind him the appellants herein who are three in number and
therefore as per the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Sarla
Verma and Others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another
reported in 2009 SAR (Civ) 592, 1/3rd of earnings of the
deceased are required to be deduced towards personal and
living expenses which the deceased would have incurred for
himself had he been alive. But the Tribunal deducted 50% of
the earnings unjustifiably. Learned counsel also submits that
though appellants No.2 and 3 are the married daughters of the
deceased, yet the deceased was supporting them financially
and therefore there should be termed to be the dependents of
NC: 2024:KHC:44682
the deceased. Learned counsel contends that even the married
daughters are entitled for compensation under the head 'loss of
dependency'. In this regard, learned counsel relies upon the
decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case between National
Insurance Company Limited Vs. Birender and Others reported
in (2020) AIR (SC) 434, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court
dealing at length with regard to the contents of Section 166 of
the Motor Vehicles Act and Section 2(11) of CPC, at para 15 of
the decision held as under:
"15. It is thus settled by now that the legal
representatives of the deceased have a right to
apply for compensation. Having said that, it
must necessarily follow that even the major
married and earning sons of the deceased being
legal representatives have a right to apply for
compensation and it would be the bounden duty
of the Tribunal to consider the application
irrespective of the fact whether the concerned
legal representative was fully dependent on the
deceased and not to limit the claim towards
conventional heads only."
5. Though Smt.Nirmala, learned counsel for
respondent states that the decision of the Tribunal is valid in all
NC: 2024:KHC:44682
aspects, yet having considered the decision that is referred
supra, this Court is of the view that even appellants No.2 and 3
are required to be considered to be the dependents of the
deceased. Thus, the dependents would be three in number.
Therefore, 1/3rd of the earnings of the deceased are required to
be deducted towards his personal and living expenses as per
the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Sarla Verma and
Others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another reported in
2009 SAR (Civ) 592. Thus, without disturbing the other
parameters, deducting 1/3rd of the income towards personal
and living expenses, the compensation which the appellants are
entitled to under the head loss of dependency will be as under:
Description Amount
Rs.
Income per month 10,694-00
Annual income(10,694x12) 1,28,328-00
On deducting 1/3rd towards
personal and living 85,552-00
expenses
Loss of dependency, on
applying appropriate 4,27,760-00
multiplier '5'
6. The Tribunal through the impugned order awarded
a sum of Rs.3,21,000/- only under the head loss of
NC: 2024:KHC:44682
dependency. Thus, enhancement will be Rs.1,06,760/-
(Rs.4,27,760/- - Rs.3,21,000/-).
7. Thus, in the light of the foregoing discussion, the
appeal is disposed of with the following
ORDER
i) The appeal is allowed in part.
ii) The compensation that is granted by the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, Mysuru, through orders in MVC
No.212/2018 dated 07.10.2021 is enhanced by Rs.1,06,760/-.
iii) The enhanced sum shall carry interest at the rate of
6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit.
iv) Out of the enhanced sum, appellant No.1 is entitled to
50%, the appellants No.2 and 3 are entitled to 25% each.
v) The respondent is directed to deposit the enhanced
sum within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of
copy of this order.
NC: 2024:KHC:44682
vi) On such deposit, the appellants are permitted to
withdraw their respective shares along with accrued interest.
Sd/-
(DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA)
JUDGE
AP
CT:TSM
